Houdaille Industries, Inc. v. Cunningham
Texas Supreme Court
1DissentPope, Justice
I respectfully dissent from that part of the opinion of the majority which holds that a photograph is not a written communication and protected from discovery by the provisions of Rule 167. The majority opinion does not disclose whether it reaches its conclusion because a photograph is not written or because it is not a communication or both. Its only treatment of the subject is contained in its holding: “We hold that photographs are not written communications and are not within the terms of the Rule 167 proviso.”
The word, “photograph,” is a joinder of the Greek words, “photo,” meaning light…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Dallas Railway & Terminal Co. v. OrrTexas Supreme Court · 1948
- Whitford v. North State Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- Dallas Ry. & Terminal Co. v. DurkeeCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1946
- Texas Employers' Insurance v. CrowTexas Supreme Court · 1949
- Younger Bros., Inc. v. RossCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1941
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.